Comparison of chest CT severity scoring systems for COVID-19
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology..
PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance and inter-observer agreement of five different CT chest severity scoring systems for COVID-19 to find the most precise one with the least interpretation time.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective study included 85 patients (54 male and 31 female) with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. They underwent CT to assess the severity of pulmonary involvement. Three readers were asked to assess the pulmonary abnormalities and score the severity using five different systems, including chest CT severity score (CT-SS), chest CT score, total severity score (TSS), modified total severity score (m-TSS), and 3-level chest CT severity score. Time consumption on reporting of each system was calculated.
RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five observations were reported for each system. There was a statistically significant inter-observer agreement in assessing qualitative lung involvement using the m-TSS and the other four quantitative systems. The ROC curves revealed excellent and very good diagnostic accuracy for all systems when cutoff values for detection severe cases were > 22, > 17, > 12, and > 26 for CT-SS, chest CT score, TSS, and 3-level CT severity score. The AUC was very good (0.86), excellent (0.90), very good (0.89), and very good (0.86), respectively. Chest CT score showed the highest specificity (95.2%) in discrimination of severe cases. Time consumption on reporting was significantly different (< 0.001): CT-SS > 3L-CT-SS > chest CT score > TSS.
CONCLUSION: All chest CT severity scoring systems in this study demonstrated excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. CT-SS and TSS had the highest specificity and least time for interpretation.
KEY POINTS: • All chest CT severity scoring systems discussed in this study revealed excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. • Chest CT scoring system and TSS had the highest specificity. • Both TSS and m-TSS consumed the least time compared to the other three scoring systems.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:32 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
European radiology - 32(2022), 5 vom: 14. Mai, Seite 3501-3512 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Elmokadem, Ali H [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
COVID-19 |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 27.04.2022 Date Revised 16.08.2022 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s00330-021-08432-5 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM335666477 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM335666477 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225230353.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00330-021-08432-5 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1118.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM335666477 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)35031841 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Elmokadem, Ali H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of chest CT severity scoring systems for COVID-19 |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 27.04.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 16.08.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology. | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance and inter-observer agreement of five different CT chest severity scoring systems for COVID-19 to find the most precise one with the least interpretation time | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective study included 85 patients (54 male and 31 female) with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. They underwent CT to assess the severity of pulmonary involvement. Three readers were asked to assess the pulmonary abnormalities and score the severity using five different systems, including chest CT severity score (CT-SS), chest CT score, total severity score (TSS), modified total severity score (m-TSS), and 3-level chest CT severity score. Time consumption on reporting of each system was calculated | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five observations were reported for each system. There was a statistically significant inter-observer agreement in assessing qualitative lung involvement using the m-TSS and the other four quantitative systems. The ROC curves revealed excellent and very good diagnostic accuracy for all systems when cutoff values for detection severe cases were > 22, > 17, > 12, and > 26 for CT-SS, chest CT score, TSS, and 3-level CT severity score. The AUC was very good (0.86), excellent (0.90), very good (0.89), and very good (0.86), respectively. Chest CT score showed the highest specificity (95.2%) in discrimination of severe cases. Time consumption on reporting was significantly different (< 0.001): CT-SS > 3L-CT-SS > chest CT score > TSS | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: All chest CT severity scoring systems in this study demonstrated excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. CT-SS and TSS had the highest specificity and least time for interpretation | ||
| 520 | |a KEY POINTS: • All chest CT severity scoring systems discussed in this study revealed excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. • Chest CT scoring system and TSS had the highest specificity. • Both TSS and m-TSS consumed the least time compared to the other three scoring systems | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a COVID-19 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Computed tomography, X-ray | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Coronavirus | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Lung | |
| 650 | 4 | |a SARS-COV-2 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mounir, Ahmad M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ramadan, Zainab A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Elsedeiq, Mahmoud |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Saleh, Gehad A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t European radiology |d 1991 |g 32(2022), 5 vom: 14. Mai, Seite 3501-3512 |w (DE-627)NLM087691310 |x 1432-1084 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:32 |g year:2022 |g number:5 |g day:14 |g month:05 |g pages:3501-3512 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08432-5 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 32 |j 2022 |e 5 |b 14 |c 05 |h 3501-3512 | ||